Kidsdata.org reports the estimated percentage of youth ages 16-19 who are neither employed (full or part time) nor enrolled in school (full or part time). Data are available for:

• Counties and county groups, as single-year estimates
• Cities, school districts, and counties with at least 10,000 residents, as 5-year estimates
• Legislative districts, as 5-year estimates

Millions of youth and young adults in America are neither in school nor working (1). These young people—often referred to as 'disconnected youth' or 'opportunity youth'—are more likely to face long-term challenges in adulthood, including poor physical and mental health, lower incomes, and unemployment (1, 2). Because engagement in school or the workforce is critical for the transition from adolescence to adulthood, detachment from those settings—especially long-term detachment—can impede development of the knowledge and skills needed to thrive as self-sufficient adults (1, 3).

The effects also extend beyond the individual. A nation with a skilled workforce is better prepared to compete in today's global economy, making youth disconnection in the U.S. a serious social and economic concern (3). Considering both direct costs (such as public assistance and incarceration) and indirect costs (such as lost earnings and tax revenue), the burden of disconnected youth on taxpayers has been estimated as high as $93 billion annually (3). Research also shows that investments in reconnecting these young people yield substantial economic gains; for example, it is estimated that every dollar spent on connecting youth to jobs or education yields a five-dollar return (3, 4).

Factors that place older teens at increased risk for becoming disengaged from school and work include living in poverty, experiencing unstable housing or homelessness, having a disability, being involved in the foster care or criminal justice systems, and becoming a parent, among others (1, 2, 4). Statewide and nationally, African American/black, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Hispanic/Latino youth are more likely than their white and Asian/Pacific Islander peers to be disconnected from work and school, as are youth from rural areas when compared with those in urban and suburban areas (1, 5).

In 2021, the estimated share of disconnected youth—teens ages 16-19 who are neither employed at least part time nor enrolled in school at least part time—was 7.2% in California and 7.1% in the U.S. overall.

Five-year rates of youth disconnection in California have followed national trends closely for more than a decade, declining steadily beginning in 2010-2014, then reversing in 2016-2020.

At the local level, the percentage of youth disconnected from work and school varies widely, with 2016-2020 estimates for regions with data ranging from 1.7% to 12.2% across counties and from 0.1% to 17.3% across school districts.

In recent years, policymakers increasingly have focused on issues surrounding disconnected youth, recognizing the substantial number of teens and young adults who, if not reconnected with school or work, face increased risks for adverse life outcomes, including physical and mental health problems in adulthood and long-term struggles with unemployment (1, 2). For society at large, youth disconnection contributes to significant costs related to having an uneducated and unskilled workforce, increased crime and incarceration, and a greater need for public assistance (3). Youth disconnection disproportionately affects young people of color, those with disabilities, those in the foster care or criminal justice systems, young parents, and those who are homeless, living in poverty, or in rural or underserved communities (1, 2, 4).

Policymakers can prioritize and invest in strategies to prevent youth from becoming disconnected in the first place and to reengage disconnected youth with school, work, and community (5). Research shows that investments in reconnecting these youth yield substantial economic returns (3, 4). Policy solutions should be comprehensive and evidence-based, and they should work across sectors and levels of government (4, 5).

Policy and program options that could prevent or address youth disconnection include:

• Ensuring that all families have access to affordable, high-quality early childhood education—which can reduce academic disparities and lay the foundation for later success—and effective family support programs, such home-visiting services (5, 6)
• Creating long-term funding solutions for California's early childhood, K-12, and higher education systems, ensuring equitable distribution of resources, curricula, and staff (6)
• Assuring that all schools, especially those in rural and low-income communities, provide safe, positive environments with non-punitive discipline policies and effective systems to address students’ academic, physical, emotional, behavioral, and other needs (5, 6)
• Supporting struggling students by increasing investments in and access to counseling, mentoring, summer learning, and after-school programs; also, supporting flexible learning options that allow students to earn high school credits through non-traditional paths (6, 7)
• Improving transition planning between high school and college, especially for vulnerable youth, and ensuring that K-12 students have equitable access to college preparatory resources (7, 8)
• Supporting efforts among high schools, community colleges, nonprofits, and local workforce investment boards to provide career and technical pathways that link youth with internships, apprenticeships, job training, and career services; as part of this, building partnerships with and incentivizing employers to hire and train youth (4, 7, 9)
• Strengthening cross-sector community efforts to provide case management and comprehensive support services (e.g., mental health care, child care, transportation, etc.) for disconnected youth and young adults (4, 9)
• Supporting youth engagement and youth development programs—such as youth advisory councils, civic engagement programs, volunteer projects, and service learning—that allow youth to become active decision-makers in their own lives, take on leadership roles, and contribute to their communities (1, 5, 6)